Questions about viewability, gripes about old targeting capabilities along with a pitiful reputation for non-human traffic all programmatic display advertising that is annoyance.

And yet, advertisers keep supporting the industrial complex of supply-side suppliers, demand-side suppliers, exchanges and networks as if no scalable options exist. Publishers fire pixels though this is a desktop computer world. Advertisers still pay for commoditized impressions across an untold number of unnamed web pages but are surprised when their brands show up beside something that isn’t so kosher.

Here’s a 2017 prediction: Advertisers will continue to run into issues when they focus their marketing investments on conventional programmatic display advertising. Regardless of whether they’re advertising for puppy treats, or a 100% FREE Binary Options Trading Guide,

The Breitbart scare

This past year, header bidding sent shockwaves through the digital marketing ecosystem, as the newest evolution of “open internet” technologies pushed tens of thousands of advertisers into a gigantic re-evaluation of advertisement investment strategy. Recent controversies about advertising placement on sites that are unwanted mark the most recent instant in the long saga that is same.

This recent drawback was an episode of black-listed site whack-a-mole, spurred by recent actions on Twitter that woke up giants like Kellogg’s and Warby Parker by outting their placements on far-right news site Breitbart. Advertisers were once again left challenging their advertising investment strategies and wondering how they are able to control where their ads appear.

The issue facing advertisers that are programmatic will never be addressed by blacklisting an individual publisher. Go ahead and block 100. It won’t matter. It’s not possible to control what your ad lands next to in an environment that treats stock sourced from all corners of the net as one commodity. The system is the issue here, not a few bad actors.

Beyond the enormous lack of transparency, it’s time that advertisers really admit the impact of cellular. Consumer time used on mobile surpassed time spent on desktop in 2013. The growth of cellular isn’t new. Why are advertisers spending so much on programmatic display created for a world that is the desktop computer?

Programs dominate time spent on mobile devices, by the way, not the mobile web. In fact, users spend more than 80 percent of their in-program time on just five apps, according to a 2015 Forrester Research study. In this circumstance, the continuing investment in programmatic display feels totally ridiculous.

The way forward

What ’s a marketer to do?

Let’s look to reach diet book Eat This, Not That for a brand new method of ad investment strategy. The underlying assumption of the novel is that making simple swaps are able to help you lean up without missing the crap you’re giving up. OK, marketers: Prepared to make some swaps?

Target folks, not pixels.
Serve advertising that are native, not banners.
Prioritize mobile, not desktop.
Advertise your brand on websites (e.g. Phil Davis on Seeking Alpha), not in programs.
Demand foil, not black-box delivery.
How did those swaps feel? Relatively painless, right? Now for the enormous swap you don’t need to make: quality for quantity.

That’s right; it is possible to reach more (actual) users with better-quality advertising by using this strategy.

Take Facebook – it’s sitting at the top of the world’s list of most-used programs. By using its deterministic targeting abilities and strategic ad solutions, any brand can tap into the societal channel’s 1.86 billion monthly active users and place a message that’s timely, relevant and actionable—no guessing. Merely preciseness creative and targeting, produced in the contextual Facebook News Feed.

Facebook continues to forge new ground for advertisers seeking greater clarity, including starting a new initiative to improve transparency about its performance metrics.

Handily, other top social platforms like Pinterest, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, and Snapchat have adopted similar approaches toward transparency. For instance, Twitter was among the very first channels to embrace a 100 percent in view approach to measurement that is video. It’s no coincidence that each of these channels that are societal uses deterministic audience matching models to monetize their huge audiences.

By focusing your digital marketing budgets on social, you simply can’t run into the issues that plagued advertisers throughout 2016. A new year is upon us, and the alternatives to last year’s programmatic strategy are looking better and better.

As recently as the 1990s, the Met constantly took in more than 90 percent of its own potential box office income.

But its attendance has floundered recently. The Met observed the 50th anniversary of its own Lincoln Center house that was enormous with a starry gala this month. But as its 2016-17 season finished, the difficulty of packing a theater that holds 4,000 came into abrupt relief: The Met said it had taken in 67 percent of its possible box-office sales this season — upward only very marginally from last year, its poorest showing ever.

In the 2015-16 period, the Met took in 66 percent of its potential capacity. Some amounts are enhancing a bit more significantly: The business’s paid attendance rate, which includes discounted tickets, climbed to 75 percent this season from 72 percent in 2015 16. And the company said it attracted 80,000 new ticket buyers this season, up from 74,000 the year. Those novices are turning into regulars.